How Does Substituting t=∞ Affect the Fourier Transform of g(t)?

  • Thread starter frenzal_dude
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Integral
In summary: Theta_1)-jwt}=e^{j\omega_1 t+j\Theta_1-j\omega t}=e^{j(\omega_1-\omega)t}e^{j\Theta_1}...that this is a bounded function, so it can't approach zero as t approaches infinity.
  • #1
frenzal_dude
77
0

Homework Statement


Hi, I need to find the Fourier Transform of:

g(t) = (e^-t)Sin(Wct)u(t)

where Wc=2πFc
and u(t) is the step function which is equal to 1 if time is +ve and 0 otherwise.

Homework Equations


I know that g(t) = (e^-t)[e^jWct - e^-jWct]/2j = [e^-t(1+jWc) - e^t(-1-jWc)]/(2j)
(0<=t<=∞, because of step function u(t))

The Attempt at a Solution


Therefore the Fourier Transform would be:
[1/(2j)]*∫([e^-t(1+jWc) - e^t(-1-jWc)])(e^-jWt)dt

= [1/(2j)]*∫([e^-t(1-jWc+jW) - e^t(-1-jWc-jW)])dt (limits: t=∞ to t=0)

= [1/(2j)][(e^-t(1-jWc+jW))/(-(1-jWc+jW)) - (e^t(-1-jWc-jW))/(-1-jWc-jW)] (sub in: t=∞ to t=0)

If you sub t=+/-∞, the exponential could be 0 or it could be infinite depending on whether 1-jWc+jW and -1-jWc-jW are -ve or +ve.
How can we know if they are positive or negative?

Hope you guys can help!
David.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I'd assume that Wc ([itex]\omega_c[/itex]?) is real-valued.

[tex]\lim_{t\to\infty}e^{-zt}=0[/itex]

So long as the real part of [itex]z[/itex] is positive.

Also, if [itex]g(t)[/itex] is zero for negative [itex]t[/itex], why is one of your integration limits [itex]-\infty[/itex]?
 
  • #3
gabbagabbahey said:
I'd assume that Wc ([itex]\omega_c[/itex]?) is real-valued.

[tex]\lim_{t\to\infty}e^{-zt}=0[/itex]

So long as the real part of [itex]z[/itex] is positive.

Also, if [itex]g(t)[/itex] is zero for negative [itex]t[/itex], why is one of your integration limits [itex]-\infty[/itex]?

so is it also true to say: [tex]\lim_{t\to\infty}e^{zt}=0[/itex] so long as the real part of [itex]z[/itex] is negative?

If that's true that helps me out A LOT! This is something not even my Signal Processing lecturer could explain to me, he told me 'he'd get back to me' and he never did.

Thankyou so much for your help!

Btw I fixed up the limits, you're right it's from t=infinity to t=0
 
  • #4
btw this is the answer I got:
[tex]\frac{\omega + j}{(\omega_c-w)^2+1}[/tex]
 
  • #5
frenzal_dude said:
so is it also true to say: [tex]\lim_{t\to\infty}e^{zt}=0[/itex] so long as the real part of [itex]z[/itex] is negative?

Yes, it's fairly easy to show simply by splitting [itex]z[/itex] into real and imaginary parts. Say [itex]z=x+jy[/itex], where [itex]x[/itex] and [itex]y[/itex] are real-valued. Euler's formula then tells you[tex]e^{zt}=e^{(x+jy)t}=e^{jyt}e^{xt}=\cos(yt)e^{xt}+j\sin(yt)e^{xt}[/tex]

As [itex]t\to\infty[/itex], both [itex]\sin(yt)[/itex] and [itex]\cos(yt)[/itex] oscillate between [itex]0[/itex] and [itex]1[/itex] more and more rapidly, and hence are bounded. Meanwhile, [itex]e^{xt}[/itex] goes rapidly to zero if [itex]x<0[/itex] and so its product with any bounded function will also approach zero.

frenzal_dude said:
btw this is the answer I got:
[tex]\frac{\omega + j}{(\omega_c-w)^2+1}[/tex]

That doesn't look quite right, you'd better show your calculations.
 
Last edited:
  • #6
Here's my working out:

[tex]g(t)=e^{-t}sin(\omega _ct)u(t)=
e^{-t}(\frac{1}{2j}e^{j\omega _ct}-\frac{1}{2j}e^{-j\omega _ct})u(t)[/tex]
 
Last edited:
  • #7
[tex]\therefore G(f)
=\frac{1}{2j}\int_{0}^{\infty }(e^{j\omega _ct-t}-e^{-j\omega _ct-t})e^{-j\omega t}dt=\frac{1}{2j}\int_{0}^{\infty }e^{j\omega_ct-t-j\omega t}-e^{-j\omega_ct-t-j\omega t}dt[/tex]
 
  • #8
[tex]\frac{1}{2j}\int_{0}^{\infty }e^{j\omega_ct-t-j\omega t}-e^{-j\omega_ct-t-j\omega t}dt=\frac{1}{2j}[\frac{e^{t(j(\omega_c-w)-1)}}{j\omega_c-1-j\omega}-\frac{e^{-t(j(\omega_c+w)+1)}}{-j\omega_c-1-j\omega}]t=\infty ,t=0[/tex]
 
  • #9
[tex]=-\frac{1}{2j}[\frac{1}{j(\omega_c-\omega)-1}+\frac{1}{j(\omega_c+\omega)+1}]=\frac{\omega_c+\omega+j}{2(\omega_c+\omega)^2+2}+\frac{\omega_c-\omega-j}{2(\omega_c-\omega)^2+2}[/tex]
 
  • #10
frenzal_dude said:
Here's my working out:

[tex]g(t)=e^{-t}sin(\omega _ct)u(t)=
e^{-t}(\frac{1}{2j}e^{j\omega _ct}-\frac{1}{2j}e^{-j\omega _ct})[/tex]

Ermm... you mean [itex]g(t)=e^{-t}\left(\frac{1}{2j}e^{j\omega _ct}-\frac{1}{2j}e^{-j\omega _ct}\right)u(t)[/itex], right? You can't get rid of the [itex]u(t)[/itex] until you put it into the integral and use the fact that [itex]\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}f(t)u(t)dt=\int_{0}^{\infty}f(t)dt[/itex]

frenzal_dude said:
[tex]=-\frac{1}{2j}[\frac{1}{j(\omega_c-\omega)-1}+\frac{1}{j(\omega_c+\omega)+1}]=\frac{\omega_c+\omega+j}{2(\omega_c+\omega)^2+2}+\frac{\omega_c-\omega-j}{2(\omega_c-\omega)^2+2}[/tex]

This looks fine, but it doesn't simplify to what you wrote originally.
 
  • #11
do you mean what I wrote originally by this: [tex]
\frac{\omega + j}{(\omega_c-w)^2+1}
[/tex]

I realized where I went wrong and tried it again.

With my final answer, which I hope is now correct, I tried getting a common denominator to make it into one fraction but the fraction ended up being even more complicated, so I thought I'd just leave the answer as how I gave it before

(btw here was the fraction I got when I simplified it: [tex]\frac{\omega_c(\omega_c^2+\omega^2+1)-2\omega^2-2\omega j}{(\omega_c^2+\omega^2+1)-4\omega^2}[/tex])
 
  • #12
Your answer from post#9 is correct.

Personally, I wouldn't worry so much about making the denominator real and instead concentrate on putting it over a common denominator:

[tex]\begin{aligned}-\frac{1}{2j}\left[\frac{1}{j(\omega_c-\omega)-1}+\frac{1}{j(\omega_c+\omega)+1}\right] &= -\frac{1}{2j}\left[\frac{j(\omega_c+\omega)+1+j(\omega_c-\omega)-1}{\left(j(\omega_c-\omega)-1\right)\left(j(\omega_c+\omega)+1\right)}\right] \\ &= -\frac{1}{2j}\left[\frac{2j\omega_c}{j^2(\omega_c^2-\omega^2)-2j\omega-1}\right] \\ &= \frac{\omega_c}{\omega_c^2-\omega^2+2j\omega+1} \end{aligned} [/tex]
 
  • #13
Thanks for the help.

Quick question in regards to [tex]
\lim_{t\to\infty}e^{-zt}=0
[/tex]

What if z is only imaginary? ie. the real part is 0.

How would you sub t=∞ into this: [tex]e^{j(\omega_1 t+\Theta_1)-jwt}[/tex]
 
  • #14
If the real part is zero, then the limit won't exist. You can use Euler's formula to show this.
 

FAQ: How Does Substituting t=∞ Affect the Fourier Transform of g(t)?

What does it mean to sub t=∞ into an integral?

Subbing t=∞ into an integral means to replace the variable t with the value of infinity (∞) in the limits of integration.

When is it appropriate to sub t=∞ into an integral?

Subbing t=∞ into an integral is appropriate when the function being integrated has a limit of infinity as one of its bounds.

What happens to the integral when t=∞ is subbed in?

Subbing t=∞ into an integral can change the value of the integral, depending on the function being integrated and the behavior of the function at infinity.

Is it possible to sub t=∞ into all integrals?

No, it is not always possible to sub t=∞ into integrals. This substitution is only valid when the limit of integration is infinity and the function being integrated has a well-defined behavior at infinity.

Can subbing t=∞ into an integral help solve it?

Subbing t=∞ into an integral can sometimes help simplify or evaluate an integral, but it is not a guaranteed method for solving integrals. Other techniques, such as integration by parts or substitution, may also be necessary.

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
7K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
16
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
946
Replies
2
Views
3K
Back
Top